Jamaal Charles deserves to be in Pro Football Hall of Fame

Former Kansas City Chiefs running back Jamaal Charles deserves a spot in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Former Kansas City Chiefs running back JJamaal Charles will be eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 2024.

I’m here to argue Charles’ case for enshrinement. Charles belongs in the Hall of Fame—full stop.

A distinction must be addressed when arguing whether or not an NFL player deserves to be in the Hall. Let’s call it the “will vs. should” distinction. In other words, arguing whether or not a player will make the Hall of Fame is different from arguing whether a player should make the hall of fame.

The answer to the “will” question is typically more straightforward. After all, we have a bevy of evidence regarding the statistical thresholds a player usually must meet to make Canton. For instance, Frank Gore will probably make the Hall of Fame because every player to rush for comparable yardage is already inducted.

The second question, the “should,” is less clear-cut. To argue whether a player should make the HOF requires establishing or referring to criteria that may differ from the traditional one. In Charles’s case, I argue that his phenomenal efficiency affirms that he belongs in the hallowed halls of Canton.

The Facts

Jamaal Charles is the most efficient running back in NFL history in terms of yards per carry. He averaged 5.4 yards/carry for his career. Charles also averaged over 5 yards/carry in 8 of his 11 seasons in the NFL.

Charles flirted with 2,000 scrimmage yards twice in his career, in 2010 and 2013, with 1,935 and 1,980 yards respectively. Charles gained over 1,300 scrimmage yards five times in his career.

Charles also ran for 1509 yards in 2012, one year removed from an ACL tear. The 2012 Chiefs were also one of the worst NFL teams since Y2K, posting a 2-14 record. The 2012 Chiefs scored fewer points than every other NFL team, yet Charles posted 1,745 yards from scrimmage in 2012. He finished his career with 10,156 yards from scrimmage.

Charles’ career was hindered by injury. He tore his ACL twice, in 2011 and 2015. In both seasons, he was on a trajectory for excellent years. In the three years following his 2011 tear, Charles registered over 1,300 yards from scrimmage consecutively.

Charles is a 2x All-Pro and 4x Pro Bowler.

Career Stats

1,407 rushes, 7,563 yards, 44 TDs, 5.4 yards/carry;  310 receptions, 2,593 yards,  20 TDs; 10,156 yards from scrimmage, 64 total TDs

The Case

Charles’ case rests upon the idea that yards per carry are a better indicator of skill than career rushing yards and touchdowns.

Yards-per-carry, provided the RB has a large enough sample size, is a better indicator of skill than accumulated yards and touchdowns. Yards per carry reflect the average amount of damage a runner does to a defense. The larger the sample size, the better the indication of damage done. Charles ran the ball over 1,400 times in his career, which is more than enough carries to validate the value of his yards per carry.

I don’t mean to dismiss total yards and total touchdowns. Instead, the point is that volume rushing yards/ TDs and yards per carry differ in terms of how much they can tell us about a player. Ultimately, yards per carry tell us more about a player’s skill than volume stats.

To illustrate what I mean, consider this example: Player A rushes for 12,000 yards and 90 TDs at decent efficiency (4.3 ypc) across a 15-year career.

More Articles About Chiefs Hall of Fame:

With no other information than that, what do we know about Player A? Well, we know they stayed healthy for considerable stretches. We know they carried the ball a lot. We know their team(s) trusted and valued them enough to give them the rock quite often. So we can safely assume they were consistent, a workhorse, and probably quite good at least for stretches. Based on running backs that have made it, we can safely assume that they are, or will be in the hall of fame.

Do we know whether player A is great, whether they are Hall of Fame worthy? The simple fact is this player would most likely make the HOF, but that’s not the point. The question is more, based on these stats, is it safe to assume this player is great? Do the yardage numbers and touchdowns paint a convincing enough picture? They may, but either way, in saying that this player deserves HOF inclusion, we’re saying that this player’s stats are good enough in some respect. The question at hand is why certain statistical cutoffs (10,000+ rushing yards, 90 + TD’s) are historically convincing cutoffs, while other statistics may not be.

Compare “Player A” to Jamaal Charles: Charles: 7,563 rushing yards on 5.4 ypc with 44 TDs.

Yards per carry can be misleading in a small sample size. But having run for over 7,500 yards, it’s safe to assume this player’s efficiency isn’t a fluke. We know that this player either regularly gashed long runs, regularly ran for solid gains, or both. However you slice it, you know Charles regularly moved the rock at a highly effective rate.

Yards per carry tell us the average amount of damage a runner did to opponents. Volume stats illuminate certain positive traits: consistency, availability, and others. But it doesn’t make sense that prolific volume stats are treated as an absolute necessity, while efficiency metrics aren’t placed on that pedestal.

Charles deserves to be in the HOF because he ranks #1 in the most important statistic to a running back’s name. The most efficient running back in NFL history deserves enshrinement. Charles’ staggering efficiency is convincing evidence of his greatness; where volume statistics tell a story, efficiency to the degree of Charles tells Canton’s voters what they need to know: that he was great. It’s time for Charles’ excellence to be appreciated without the typical caveat regarding his career volume stats.

Jamaal Charles is the greatest in the category that arguably matters the most, and deserves Hall of Fame inclusion.